Secrecy breeds questions for school board

Published: Monday, June 2, 2014 at 03:09 PM.

At least now we know what those hours spent talking in secret were about.

But that’s all that can be determined with much certainty after Friday’s stunning late-afternoon announcement that a Board of Education divided by a Grand Canyon-size measure had concocted an agreement to accept what — by all appearances at least — is the forced resignation of Lillie Cox as superintendent of the Alamance-Burlington School System.

The board reached what Chairman Tony Rose characterized as a majority decision with three members absent from the special meeting, called just inside the deadline required by the state Open Meetings Law. But after the announcement, the three members not in attendance sent a letter to the Times-News via email denouncing the move, supporting Cox, and amplifying a long-standing rift on the board that would seem to imperil any hope of progress for the local school system in the immediate future.

No reason was given for this alleged resignation by Cox, and none will likely be forthcoming. The board locked down an agreement that will pay Cox a baseline $200,000 with an additional payout for unused vacation and other leave. In return, Cox resigns effective June 30, and is mandated to do so in silence. For its part, the board also agrees not to make disparaging remarks about Cox and won’t impede her efforts to find another job.

Done deal.

Apparently this is how the board spent those nebulous seven-plus hours in closed session on May 19 and into the wee hours of May 20 — finding a way to secretly get rid of a superintendent it didn’t want any more but could find no actionable reason to legally fire. Instead, four board members engineered a pact that would not only achieve its first objective, but also maintain its secrecy and what conspiracy theorists like to call “plausible deniability.” In this case, that would be the charade that Cox, a highly regarded education administrator, left without being otherwise prompted to do so.

That Cox has three steadfast supporters on the board, backing by the Alamance-Burlington Association of Educators and several admirers around the state only further muddies the picture. In fact, it makes us wonder what this Gang of Four — Rose, Vice-Chairwoman Patsy Simpson, Pam Thompson and Brad Evans — have detected that others have not regarding the outgoing superintendent? After all, only eight months ago the same board voted 6-1, with Simpson in opposition, to extend Cox’s contract to 2017 after another in a series of positive job evaluations since her original hire date in 2011.

Factor in the $200,000-plus payout from a public education body that has made a plea for more funding an annual budgetary rite, and it’s no shock that people in Alamance County are puzzled by it all.

For her part, Cox has been unavailable for comment beyond offering thanks in a prepared statement that also included a list of accomplishments that are indeed noteworthy. She spoke of the new strategic plan developed on her watch, decreasing dropouts while increasing graduation rates, and closing achievement gaps. Any superintendent would proudly hang their hat on those accomplishments.

Meanwhile, Rose and Simpson maintain that they have acted in the best interest of Alamance County parents and students, but it’s almost impossible to know whether that’s true or not. In the world of closely guarded secrets brokered by government, all things lead to speculation and rumor. That’s why closed-door meetings and confidentiality agreements are a pox on local government operations and serve the public in the poorest possible manner. Spending money for potentially no justifiable reason in a tight budget season is also cause for concern.

Where the board goes from here is an interesting question. The longtime tension between the two factions has been brewing for a few years but has now perhaps reached a point of no return. It’ll take better leadership than Rose has shown so far to bring those two philosophical opposites in close enough proximity to guide the school system effectively.

A good place to start would be real answers about the Cox resignation. Sadly, we’re not likely to get any.

Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published
without permission. Links are encouraged.

At least now we know what those hours spent talking in secret were about.

But that’s all that can be determined with much certainty after Friday’s stunning late-afternoon announcement that a Board of Education divided by a Grand Canyon-size measure had concocted an agreement to accept what — by all appearances at least — is the forced resignation of Lillie Cox as superintendent of the Alamance-Burlington School System.

The board reached what Chairman Tony Rose characterized as a majority decision with three members absent from the special meeting, called just inside the deadline required by the state Open Meetings Law. But after the announcement, the three members not in attendance sent a letter to the Times-News via email denouncing the move, supporting Cox, and amplifying a long-standing rift on the board that would seem to imperil any hope of progress for the local school system in the immediate future.

No reason was given for this alleged resignation by Cox, and none will likely be forthcoming. The board locked down an agreement that will pay Cox a baseline $200,000 with an additional payout for unused vacation and other leave. In return, Cox resigns effective June 30, and is mandated to do so in silence. For its part, the board also agrees not to make disparaging remarks about Cox and won’t impede her efforts to find another job.

Done deal.

Apparently this is how the board spent those nebulous seven-plus hours in closed session on May 19 and into the wee hours of May 20 — finding a way to secretly get rid of a superintendent it didn’t want any more but could find no actionable reason to legally fire. Instead, four board members engineered a pact that would not only achieve its first objective, but also maintain its secrecy and what conspiracy theorists like to call “plausible deniability.” In this case, that would be the charade that Cox, a highly regarded education administrator, left without being otherwise prompted to do so.

That Cox has three steadfast supporters on the board, backing by the Alamance-Burlington Association of Educators and several admirers around the state only further muddies the picture. In fact, it makes us wonder what this Gang of Four — Rose, Vice-Chairwoman Patsy Simpson, Pam Thompson and Brad Evans — have detected that others have not regarding the outgoing superintendent? After all, only eight months ago the same board voted 6-1, with Simpson in opposition, to extend Cox’s contract to 2017 after another in a series of positive job evaluations since her original hire date in 2011.

Factor in the $200,000-plus payout from a public education body that has made a plea for more funding an annual budgetary rite, and it’s no shock that people in Alamance County are puzzled by it all.

For her part, Cox has been unavailable for comment beyond offering thanks in a prepared statement that also included a list of accomplishments that are indeed noteworthy. She spoke of the new strategic plan developed on her watch, decreasing dropouts while increasing graduation rates, and closing achievement gaps. Any superintendent would proudly hang their hat on those accomplishments.

Meanwhile, Rose and Simpson maintain that they have acted in the best interest of Alamance County parents and students, but it’s almost impossible to know whether that’s true or not. In the world of closely guarded secrets brokered by government, all things lead to speculation and rumor. That’s why closed-door meetings and confidentiality agreements are a pox on local government operations and serve the public in the poorest possible manner. Spending money for potentially no justifiable reason in a tight budget season is also cause for concern.

Where the board goes from here is an interesting question. The longtime tension between the two factions has been brewing for a few years but has now perhaps reached a point of no return. It’ll take better leadership than Rose has shown so far to bring those two philosophical opposites in close enough proximity to guide the school system effectively.

A good place to start would be real answers about the Cox resignation. Sadly, we’re not likely to get any.